The Rocky Mountain Children’s Law Center strongly opposes the prosecutor bonus program highlighted in your article.

The Children’s Law Center represents more than 1,000 child victims each year, primarily as guardians ad litem in dependency and neglect cases. When our child clients suffer severe physical and sexual abuse at the hands of their caretakers, a corresponding criminal case is filed. These children have been so horribly devastated that a policy which “encourages” a prosecutor to force a case to trial and requires a child to testify, would only serve to re-victimize the child again.

This policy provides incentives for prosecutors to consider financial gain and job security over the needs of Colorado’s most vulnerable population — our children.

Stephanie Villafuerte, Denver

The writer is executive director of the Rocky Mountain Children’s Law Center and is formerly Denver’s chief deputy district attorney in charge of the Family Violence Unit.

This letter was published in the April 1 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

Not long ago the Denver media vigorously condemned District Attorney Carol Chambers for not prosecuting certain cases. She explained reasonably that pursuing cases she and her staff deemed unlikely to result in conviction would just waste taxpayers’ money. Now the same media question her for rewarding her staff for securing convictions — that is, for protecting citizens from proven criminals, for good job performance.

I applaud a taxpayer-supported agency that achieves its objective cost-efficiently. Shouldn’t we appreciate Chambers’ management of the 18th Judicial District?

Peg Brady, Centennial

This letter was published in the April 1 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

Public servants deserve thanks and recognition for exceptional performance in their jobs. But as U.S. Supreme Court Justice George Sutherland wrote more than 75 years ago, a prosecutor is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of the state, whose interest in a criminal trial is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. Cash bonuses based on conviction rates corrupt that responsibility.

District Attorney Carol Chambers’ “cash for convictions” plan encourages prosecutors to win trials for personal gain. It in no way helps ensure that justice shall be done. If she thinks her trial assistants lack necessary courtroom skills, then she should use her “office surplus” for trial advocacy and legal ethics training. Tying a public official’s compensation to the outcome of a prosecution is certainly ethically troubling.

The public needs to have confidence that a prosecutor’s office is doing the right thing for the right reasons.

Jim E. Lavine, Bellaire, Texas

The writer is president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

This letter was published in the April 1 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

I enjoyed reading the article about the new U.S. Census results in The Denver Post. However, I found one sentence rather curious. It states, “In some cases, white Latinos might be opting to list themselves as multiracial in the ‘some other race’ category, which would put the actual number of multiracial Americans lower than the official tally of 9 million.” Since many Latinos are, in fact, multiracial, I suspect the actual number of multiracial Americans to be far higher than 9 million.

Francis Wardle, Denver

The writer is executive director of the Center for the Study of Biracial Children.

This letter was published in the April 1 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

I take exception to Mark Zaitz’s thoughts on Tricare costs and comparing military personnel to teachers. I spent 23 years on call 24/7/365. Reporting to work at 3 a.m. to prepare for a 7 a.m. takeoff for a 12-hour patrol, followed by a three-hour post-flight/debrief, while on a six-month deployment away from my family, missing holidays and birthdays, flying in often-hostile airspace, I think I’ve earned everything I was promised. Those who teach our youth are unquestionably underpaid for the importance of their jobs, but the reasonable expectation of going home every night must have some value.

If our leaders are, once again, going to balance the budget on the backs of military retirees, breaking the promises upon which we based our decision to commit our adult lives to the defense of our nation, forgive us if we squeal occasionally.

Pete Lister, Greeley

This letter was published in the April 1 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

I worked for the Garfield County clerk counting ballots and as a “resolution judge” for the last election. Republicans and Democrats alike were absolutely, totally dedicated to the ballots being correctly counted. There was not one person who did not take the job seriously and who did not completely understand that the vote had been cast and politics were not part of the job — local control at its best.

We had “watchers” from both (all) parties who would say the same thing. These ballot counters were mostly older women, who have time for a temporary job, though I can assure you they were not slow or dim, and they perfectly ensured the “election integrity” Vincent Carroll refers to.

To wrest oversight of elections from the local county clerks and suggest they are not accountable is unnecessary and counterintuitive. It brings the ballots to the political secretary of state’s office, where I’m not so convinced of neutrality and that our respected ballots would be handled with the same care.

Barb Coddington, Glenwood Springs

This letter was published in the April 1 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

In a recent guest commentary, Timothy E. Wirth and Alice Madden postulated that the natural gas industry should welcome government oversight. To paraphrase, such oversight would help rid “bad actors” from the industry, which responsible companies should appreciate. To quote from the piece, “The top gas producers [should] have nothing to fear.”

Great theory, so let’s apply it to Mr. Wirth and Ms. Madden. First, we’ll refer them to Child Protective Services, which will monitor every interaction with their children or grandchildren so that nothing be deemed improper. Then, we’ll have the IRS scrutinize their financial transactions to ensure that each is reported properly. Finally, we’ll have the FBI follow their every movement so that no laws are violated.

After all, if Wirth and Madden are responsible parents, honest taxpayers and upstanding citizens, they should welcome the oversight and have nothing to fear.

Phil Goodwin, Erie

This letter was published in the April 1 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

As our state representatives consider civil unions, it is fair to ask how their decisions will be made. Obviously, theological and social implications are involved. But voters should demand that intellectual integrity drives the process.

Consider whether civil unions would diminish the institution of marriage. The two are unrelated. For most couples, marriage is a sacred religious rite involving a pledge of lifetime fidelity. The state incidentally grants certain civil rights to married couples. Civil unions would grant the same rights, but without a marriage ceremony. The essence of marriage is the pledge made before God. Civil unions are about civil rights only.

Many people have moral objections to homosexuality. But do such objections justify denying equal rights to committed gay couples?

The civil-unions bill is not asking representatives to vote for or against sin. It is asking whether there is any supportable argument that justifies denying equal rights to a selected minority. Does the state have a compelling interest in denying those rights? Absent a compelling state need, a “no” vote is unconscionable.

Paul Ziemer, Parker

This letter was published in the March 31 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

By voting to approve civil unions, Senate Democrats have shown their hypocrisy in addressing gay-rights issues. As registered Democrats, we sent a mass e-mail to Democratic senators asking that they oppose this bill because it falls way short of the equality provisions for gays and lesbians outlined in the 2010-12 Democratic Party platform.

Civil unions are not marriage and cannot be likened to marriage. The fact that Democrats are so quick to legislate crumbs for the gay community by siding with the 72 percent of Coloradans who favor second-class citizenship for same-sex couples is outrageous. We can only hope that the Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee will take a more principled stand by killing this bill outright.

Gabe Martinez and Tom Carllon, Lakewood

This letter was published in the March 31 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

Mike Littwin writes that it is only a matter of time for gay marriage and cites the Bill of Rights. Has he forgotten the Declaration of Independence, which states, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness”? The rights are from God, not from the government. We are created. “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). This is our ultimate accountability.

J.D. Moyers, Centennial

This letter was published in the March 31 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

Thanks to Mike Littwin for his comments on civil rights. As one half of a crusty old gay couple, I have asked dozens of politicians, neighbors, Focus on the Family, et cetera, how exactly gay couples “threaten traditional marriage.” So far I have not received a single coherent response, mostly no response at all. The idea of a gay guy coveting “thy neighbor’s wife” is ridiculous. Meanwhile, I hope Leviticus readers are not wearing clothes made of two fibers — a sure route to hell.

R. Opler, Parker

This letter was published in the March 31 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

Karen Dias, the woman killed in Saturday’s apartment fire in Aurora, was a great volunteer and co-worker, along with being a great mom to her family. She volunteered for a year at the Denver Inner City Parish Seniors Program, and was a dedicated and energetic worker. We loved her. She was a joy to be around, with her compassion, liveliness and laughter. She loved to sit and talk with us all, and I’ll treasure the many conversations she and I had almost daily about politics, racism, and life in general.

Our hearts go out to her family. Rest in peace, Karen. I’m sure you and God will have some great talks!

Rev. Allyson Sawtell, Denver

The writer is an associate pastor for the Denver Inner City Parish.

This letter was published in the March 31 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

The report that 16-year-old John Caudle likely will be incarcerated 54 years for killing his parents with a handgun is yet another tragic reminder of the terrible price American society pays for allowing unfettered access to dangerous weapons. John might have become a productive member of society. He was 14 when he shot his parents. What are the chances that he could have killed them without a gun after an argument over a soda?

And now we have a 12-year-old boy in Burlington who apparently faces the same fate as John Caudle. Does anyone believe a 12-year-old lacking access to guns could ever be hauled off for murder? Can anyone cite a single benefit of our current gun policies that could justify destroying the life of even one child?

Paul R. West, Fort Collins

This letter was published in the March 31 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

Society has a responsibility to protect its children. John Caudle admitted to killing his stepfather and mother, who, according to your article, “had a documented history of abusing Caudle.” At age 14, no one is an adult. The age of sexual consent is 17, so why would it be so much lower for murder?

The Bill of Rights grants us a speedy trial, yet it has been a year and a half since the crime. The most horrific thing is putting this teen in solitary confinement during this time. What damage that boy has suffered at the hands of his mother may pale by being in solitary for almost one-eighth of his life. Who is his advocate? Society has let John Caudle down.

Monica O’Brien Wolfe, Lakewood

This letter was published in the March 31 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

After listening to President Obama Monday night, I was most struck with the difference in approach we saw with how he dealt with a Middle Eastern dictator who was brutalizing and murdering his own citizens.

No lying about WMDs that didn’t exist, no propaganda or catch-phrases, no jingoism (e.g., you’re either for us or against us, we’ll go it alone!). Instead, what we heard was a higher calling to Americans — we intervened so as to let the Libyan people decide their future for their own good, as it should be.

And perhaps most importantly, we leveraged relationships with our allies, which have been rebuilt after 2008, with the result being a joint decision, sharing of both the mission and the costs associated with the mission. And it is clear that this action will not entail decades of involvement and thousands of American killed and maimed for life.

John W. Thomas, Fort Collins

This letter was published in the March 30 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

President Obama got the Arab League, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates on our team in Libya. That’s huge! Imagine how much more effective the war on terror would have been had President Bush gotten all of the nations in the Arab League on our side in Iraq and Afghanistan. Meanwhile, today’s conservative “leaders” are unable to come up with any coherent alternative response because they are too busy squabbling over whether to hate Obama for doing too much, too little, or anything at all. Good grief.

Joan Jacobson, Lakewood

This letter was published in the March 30 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

Strength Through Peace acknowledges the importance of establishing and maintaining a no-fly zone over Libya in order to prevent a massacre of civilians and rebels in Benghazi and other cities. However, we are strongly opposed to any additional military action.

We believe that grounding the Libyan air force was sufficient to allow the Libyan rebels to defend themselves, and that further attacks on Libyan government forces are likely to result in the unnecessary loss of life and a wider war in which civilians will be the biggest losers.

The U.S., Britain and France should take the following steps in order to avoid the additional loss of life and to prevent the escalation of armed conflict in Libya and elsewhere in the Middle East:

1. Cease immediately any bombing not directly related to keeping the Libyan air force on the ground.

2. Push aggressively for a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the Libyan government and the rebels.

3. Stop arming or attempting to arm dictators in the Middle East.

Kevin Cross, Fort Collins

The writer is a member of the steering committee of Strength Through Peace.

This letter was published in the March 30 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

Mike Littwin makes the point that we are now fighting four wars — Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and health care. But for the last one, he uses too narrow a brush. The “war at home” as Littwin calls it, is not just about health care, but about the intentional destruction, or enslavement, of America’s middle class by mega-business and wealthy oligarchs.

The American middle class is well on its way to becoming a destitute, homeless class, which is fine for the haves, for they will have our labor for practically nothing and we will have neither the time, energy or political clout to help ourselves. Nothing personal for the haves, you see — just business.

R. Kiefer,Arvada

This letter was published in the March 30 edition. For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.